SAMITRI DEVI Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By the medium of this petition, the petitioner is seeking a direction to the respondents to release the pension and other consequential benefits in her favour from the date her husband retired from service, on the grounds taken in the writ petition. The facts, as averred in the writ petition, are that the husband of the petitioner, namely, Balak Ram was initially engaged as a Cook on daily wage basis in the Police Department in the year 1983. He worked as such upto October 1991 when he was appointed as Water Carrier against available vacancy vide order dated 22.10.1991. it is contended that the husband of petitioner after rendering more than 18 years of service against a clear vacancy retired in the year 2010. The necessary documents were forwarded to the Office of Accountant General, Jammu vide communication dated 30.04.2010. The Senior Superintendent of Police, Rajouri also furnished all necessary information to the office of Accountant General for settlement of his pension case. The office of Accountant General vide communication dated 25.06.2010 intimated the SSP Rajouri that the husband of petitioner had rendered 18 years, 7 months and 9 days service, but as he was not confirmed nor declared quasi-permanent, therefore, is entitled to terminal gratuity only in terms of Rule 11(a) of J&K Civil Service Regulation (Temporary Service) Rules, 1961. Before the controversy could be set at rest, the husband of petitioner expired on 30.09.2011 and this is how the petitioner has filed the instant petition seeking release of family pension and other retiral benefits in her favour.

(2.) Respondents have filed objections. It is admitted by respondents 1 to 6 in their objections that husband of petitioner was initially engaged as a Daily Wager in the year 1983 and in October, 1991 was appointed as a Cook against a clear vacancy. They have also not disputed about the service and retirement of husband of petitioner as also forwarding of relevant documents to the Office of Accountant General for processing his case for issuance of Pension Payment authority Letter. Thus, the official respondents have admitted that the husband of petitioner rendered more than 18 years of service against a clear vacancy in the Police Department. However, due to deficiency pointed out by the Office of Accountant General, the petitioner was granted terminal gratuity only to the tune of Rs. 64,878/- in terms of Rule 11(a) of J&K CSR (Temporary Service) Rules, 1961.

(3.) Heard learned counsel for the parties and considered the matter.